VMware today announced that VMware Fusion 3, a major update to their virtualization software for Intel-based Macs, will begin shipping on October 27th. According to the company, this version of the software includes more than 50 new features and enhancements, delivering a better-than-ever Windows on Mac experience. Some of the key improvements include:

- Built from the ground up for the Mac, VMware Fusion 3 leverages Mac OS X Snow Leopard's advanced architecture with a new 64-bit core engine and native support for the 64-bit kernel, delivering even better Windows on Mac performance.

- VMware Fusion 3 will be the first to enable the full Windows 7 experience, side-by-side with your Mac, complete with Windows Aero and Flip 3D.

- VMware Fusion 3 will make it easy for users to bring their entire PC to their Mac in a few easy steps - wirelessly or with a simple Ethernet cable - allowing customers to protect investments in existing Windows software, and to keep using the programs they still need.

- Support for OpenGL 2.1 and DirectX 9.0c Shader Model 3 will enable users to run their favorite 3D Windows games and applications - all without rebooting.

VMware Fusion 3 is available for pre-order starting today at the price of $79.99. Upgrades from previous versions of VMware Fusion to VMware Fusion 3 will be available for $39.99 beginning on October 27th.

Do you have any feel for how Virtual Box compares to Fusion and Parallels? Pros and Cons of this open source version as opposed to the two commercial products?

I could be wrong, but I don't think it supports Boot Camp partitions without some major tweaking. That's sort of a con for me right out of the box. Fox should be able give a better answer though. He's probably running a few thousand Linux and Windows VMs these days on all three.

Yes, but only because I get an educator price ($39.95) and because I want another licensed copy to run on my new iMac. The current version does all I need it to do for what I use it for but version 3 has a few additional niceties on top of improved performance._________________Mini 1 (2012): 2.3 ghz Core i7; 10gb RAM, Corsair 240gb SSD, 500gb Seagate XT
Mini 2 (2009): 2.26 ghz Core 2 duo, 8gb RAM, 500gb SSD running Ubuntu
Also a 13" MacBook Air, 21.5" i5 iMac & 11.6" Acer 1810TZ running Ubuntu, openSUSE & Crunchbang

Do you have any feel for how Virtual Box compares to Fusion and Parallels? Pros and Cons of this open source version as opposed to the two commercial products?

I could be wrong, but I don't think it supports Boot Camp partitions without some major tweaking. That's sort of a con for me right out of the box. Fox should be able give a better answer though. He's probably running a few thousand Linux and Windows VMs these days on all three.

Thanks for that, devo. Actually, I'm getting tired of distro hopping and have gotten rid of most of the vm's I've loaded. On Windows I use only XP and that's for two programs I need that I can't get for the Mac (a translator and a stats package), as well as to check that certain documents created in Mac PowerPoint and Word look identical on a PC. On Linux, I've really centred on Ubuntu and a lighter derivative called #!CrunchBang.

To answer MacDSmith2's question, VirtualBox is a very nice product that happens to be free and I highly recommend it for most people. It does not support BootCamp partitions. The difference between VB and the other products is primarily in features. Fusion is a bit easier to use for making virtual machines, but both products make it pretty easy. Fusion has an automatic option that VB doesn't. And the biggest difference for me is one of the tools features of Fusion that VB doesn't have - drag and drop movement of files between host OS (your Mac) and the guest virtual machine. You can still move files back and forth in VB using its shared folders feature, but the drag and drop feature makes it more efficient. Parallels also has that feature, but for Windows only, not Linux.

One reason I use both programs is that certain Linux distros seem to work better on one than on the other because of differences in their tools packages. It is particularly bizarre with the next version of Ubuntu (9.10), currently in beta. As the program became updated, the audio would work properly in one but not the other, and then switch. Even weirder, the current beta gives me a black screen of death in VMware on my mini, but runs fine in VB. On my iMac, I updated an alpha image to the beta in VMware and it's fine. None of this will affect you if you use the software for Windows only. You just have to decide whether the extra features of Fusion or Parallels are worth paying for._________________Mini 1 (2012): 2.3 ghz Core i7; 10gb RAM, Corsair 240gb SSD, 500gb Seagate XT
Mini 2 (2009): 2.26 ghz Core 2 duo, 8gb RAM, 500gb SSD running Ubuntu
Also a 13" MacBook Air, 21.5" i5 iMac & 11.6" Acer 1810TZ running Ubuntu, openSUSE & Crunchbang

aren't you much of a fan of parallels nowadays?
I'm still quite enamoured with the latest builds...

Fox wrote:

Thanks for that, devo. Actually, I'm getting tired of distro hopping and have gotten rid of most of the vm's I've loaded. On Windows I use only XP and that's for two programs I need that I can't get for the Mac (a translator and a stats package), as well as to check that certain documents created in Mac PowerPoint and Word look identical on a PC. On Linux, I've really centred on Ubuntu and a lighter derivative called #!CrunchBang.

To answer MacDSmith2's question, VirtualBox is a very nice product that happens to be free and I highly recommend it for most people. It does not support BootCamp partitions. The difference between VB and the other products is primarily in features. Fusion is a bit easier to use for making virtual machines, but both products make it pretty easy. Fusion has an automatic option that VB doesn't. And the biggest difference for me is one of the tools features of Fusion that VB doesn't have - drag and drop movement of files between host OS (your Mac) and the guest virtual machine. You can still move files back and forth in VB using its shared folders feature, but the drag and drop feature makes it more efficient. Parallels also has that feature, but for Windows only, not Linux.

One reason I use both programs is that certain Linux distros seem to work better on one than on the other because of differences in their tools packages. It is particularly bizarre with the next version of Ubuntu (9.10), currently in beta. As the program became updated, the audio would work properly in one but not the other, and then switch. Even weirder, the current beta gives me a black screen of death in VMware on my mini, but runs fine in VB. On my iMac, I updated an alpha image to the beta in VMware and it's fine. None of this will affect you if you use the software for Windows only. You just have to decide whether the extra features of Fusion or Parallels are worth paying for.

Openbox only - #!CrunchBang version makes it very easy to use and modify. I also use lxpanel in place of tint2 so I can put apps on the dock.

I stopped using Parallels just before version 4 came out, and sold my copy to a colleague. The program is fine for Windows, but they were very slow in fixing problems with Linux (even current versions of Ubuntu!) and their tech support kept promising things they weren't delivering. I think they just decided that only Windows support was important and once I realized that, I ditched the product for VMware._________________Mini 1 (2012): 2.3 ghz Core i7; 10gb RAM, Corsair 240gb SSD, 500gb Seagate XT
Mini 2 (2009): 2.26 ghz Core 2 duo, 8gb RAM, 500gb SSD running Ubuntu
Also a 13" MacBook Air, 21.5" i5 iMac & 11.6" Acer 1810TZ running Ubuntu, openSUSE & Crunchbang